Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
That’s what we’ve been talking about.
We are a sadomasochistic group. Welcome!
Match points saved and squandered by the Big Four
- Thread starter jm1980
- Start date
We are a sadomasochistic group. Welcome!
jm1980
G.O.A.T.
I was able to find this report on the 2001 Novak match, and I'm now comfortable adding it to the list:
The 20-year-old Swiss held a match point at 5-4 and 40-30 in the third set against Novak but was passed going for a volley.
Finding anything about the 2002 Escude match is proving difficult, partially because it's overshadowed by the final they played in Rotterdam in 2001 (which Escude won), and by the 3 match points Escude saved in the semifinal against Grosjean. There are no mentions of a saved MP against Federer in the QF, even though he was already kind of a big deal then.
jm1980
G.O.A.T.
I think I finally cracked the mystery. The sources claiming Federer had a match point against Escude in their 2002 Rotterdam (from this table) match all trace back to Swiss journalists Simon Graf and Rene Stauffer. According to Graf (source), the match point came at 6-5 in the second set tiebreaker.
However, this is contradicted by all other independent sources:
On Friday, the 25-year-old trailed 3-5 in the second-set tiebreak before reeling off three straight points and holding on to knot the contest. (source)
Mené 5-3 dans le tie-break, il [Escude] a réussi un petit miracle pour égaliser à une manche partout. (source)
There were several mini breaks before Escude levelled the match by clinching the tiebreak 10-8 on his fourth set point. (source)
The facts here are:
1. Federer led 5-3 in the tiebreaker
2. Escude won 3 points in a row after that
3. Escude converted on his 4th set point
4. Tiebreaker ended 10-8
There is only one possible sequence of points that respects these conditions. If Federer had one match point at 6-5 (or at any score, really) this would contradict bullet points 2 and 3 (since Escude would have had a maximum of 3 set points)
The German version of the swissinfo.ch article on the match also claims Federer was two points away from winning (source):
Federer war in einer Neuauflage des letztjährigen Finals im Tiebreak des zweiten Satzes zwei Gewinnpunkte von einer gelungenen Revanche entfernt.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, it's safe to say Federer did NOT have a match point in this match.
However, this is contradicted by all other independent sources:
On Friday, the 25-year-old trailed 3-5 in the second-set tiebreak before reeling off three straight points and holding on to knot the contest. (source)
Mené 5-3 dans le tie-break, il [Escude] a réussi un petit miracle pour égaliser à une manche partout. (source)
There were several mini breaks before Escude levelled the match by clinching the tiebreak 10-8 on his fourth set point. (source)
The facts here are:
1. Federer led 5-3 in the tiebreaker
2. Escude won 3 points in a row after that
3. Escude converted on his 4th set point
4. Tiebreaker ended 10-8
There is only one possible sequence of points that respects these conditions. If Federer had one match point at 6-5 (or at any score, really) this would contradict bullet points 2 and 3 (since Escude would have had a maximum of 3 set points)
The German version of the swissinfo.ch article on the match also claims Federer was two points away from winning (source):
Federer war in einer Neuauflage des letztjährigen Finals im Tiebreak des zweiten Satzes zwei Gewinnpunkte von einer gelungenen Revanche entfernt.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, it's safe to say Federer did NOT have a match point in this match.
Last edited:
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Thanks! What a relief!I think I finally cracked the mystery. The sources claiming Federer had a match point against Escude in their 2002 Rotterdam match all trace back to Simon Graf, a Swiss journalist. According to Simon himself (source), the match point came at 6-5 in the second set tiebreaker.
However, this is contradicted by all other independent sources:
On Friday, the 25-year-old trailed 3-5 in the second-set tiebreak before reeling off three straight points and holding on to knot the contest. (source)
Mené 5-3 dans le tie-break, il [Escude] a réussi un petit miracle pour égaliser à une manche partout. (source)
There were several mini breaks before Escude levelled the match by clinching the tiebreak 10-8 on his fourth set point. (source)
The facts are:
1. Federer led 5-3
2. Escude won 3 points in a row after that
3. Escude converted on his 4th set point
4. Tiebreaker ended 10-8
There is only one possible sequence of points that respects these conditions. Simon's version that Federer had one match point at 6-5 (or at any score, really) contradicts bullet points 2 and 3 (since Escude would have had a maximum of 3 set points)
The German version of the swissinfo.ch article on the match also claims Federer was two points away from winning (source):
Federer war in einer Neuauflage des letztjährigen Finals im Tiebreak des zweiten Satzes zwei Gewinnpunkte von einer gelungenen Revanche entfernt.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, it's safe to say Federer did NOT have a match point in this match.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Yup. Nadal saved a MP to win the final.
N01E
Hall of Fame
Yes, that's why I commented when both had MPs. It was quite difficult for that match not to appear here afterwards.
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
Netcordal lol.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Save #16 for Nadal with today's win over Shapo.
dapchai
Hall of Fame
He handed it to Shapo then took it back actually.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Yup. 16-8.
Fiero425
Hall of Fame
Tiafoe gave this match away to an old man who didn't do much but stay in points until the NG'r blew it with UFE or ambitious shot making! LOSER!
-snake-
Hall of Fame
Tiafoe gave this match away to an old man who didn't do much but stay in points until the NG'r blew it with UFE or ambitious shot making! LOSER!
Classic Next genMUG stuff.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Lol...didn't do much? Only took Tiafoe to THREE breakers and had leads in ALL of them at some point!!Tiafoe gave this match away to an old man who didn't do much but stay in points until the NG'r blew it with UFE or ambitious shot making! LOSER!
Fiero425
Hall of Fame
Tiafoe was serving for 1st set w/ MP's and couldn't do it! It was a pathetic performance! Murray really didn't do anything special besides attack the net a couple times!Lol...didn't do much? Only took Tiafoe to THREE breakers and had leads in ALL of them at some point!!
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Andy was quite far from the net when he hit this one!Tiafoe was serving for 1st set w/ MP's and couldn't do it! It was a pathetic performance! Murray really didn't do anything special besides attack the net a couple times!
Third Serve
G.O.A.T.
Wow
Tennis_Freak99
Legend
Robredo:
Fiero425
Hall of Fame
Poor thing had 7 Match Points and couldn't close on a "Lucky Loser," Dom Koepfer in Paris today! WHO? I think Murray's been playing too much, getting too many free passes into events! It should stop just to save the old fool from himself playing that ridiculous defensive style which got him put under the knife in the first place! What an idiot!Murray, Murray...
Last edited:
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
@jm1980 , please update general summary in first post of the thread.
With the 7 MP wasted in this match, Murray sets the Big Four record for the quantity of MP squandered in the same match, breaking the prior record of 5 MP jointly held by Federer, Nadal and himself.
Those 7 MP came in two different games: the first two MP when Koepfer served 4/5 15/40 in the third set, and 5 MP later in the tiebreaker.
Koepfer only needed his first MP to close the match. Final score Koepfer wins 6/4 5/7 7/6(11/9).
With the 7 MP wasted in this match, Murray sets the Big Four record for the quantity of MP squandered in the same match, breaking the prior record of 5 MP jointly held by Federer, Nadal and himself.
Those 7 MP came in two different games: the first two MP when Koepfer served 4/5 15/40 in the third set, and 5 MP later in the tiebreaker.
Koepfer only needed his first MP to close the match. Final score Koepfer wins 6/4 5/7 7/6(11/9).
Last edited:
Fiero425
Hall of Fame
I just watched the 3rd set! I'm not sure, but I may have heard Murray was up a set and a break in the 2nd, but still allowed this to happen again!
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Nope, Murray had lost the first set of the match, and he was never a break up in the third set.I just watched the 3rd set! I'm not sure, but I may have heard Murray was up a set and a break in the 2nd, but still allowed this to happen again!
I corrected above where I said that Murray served for the match, it was actually Koepfer who was serving in those first 2 MP.
MUR 1-2 KOE | Andy Murray - Dominik Koepfer
MUR 1-2 KOE | Andy Murray - Dominik Koepfer
Last edited:
Fiero425
Hall of Fame
I may have been thinking of the other Brit; Evans was up a set and a break allowig Bublik to come back and defeat him in 3 sets!Nope, Murray had lost the first set of the match, and he was never a break up in the third set.
I corrected above where I said that Murray served for the match, it was actually Koepfer who was serving in those first 2 MP.
MUR 1-2 KOE | Andy Murray - Dominik Koepfer
www.flashscore.com
MUR 1-2 KOE | Andy Murray - Dominik Koepfer
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
I just looked at the list in the first post of this thread, and Paris 2012Puts even 2012 Shanghai in the shade and I never ever thought that possible!!!
My first edit above also made me change the last paragraph.
Longest streak of time of not wasting MPs is actually Djokovic’s. There’s more than 9 years between Madrid 2009 and Queen’s 2018.
That’s a bit longer than Murray’s 9 years between Paris 2012 and Paris 2021, as both editions fell in the same week of the year.
(*), (**): edited
Last edited:
BGod
Legend
Unfreaking believable. Going to watch highlights now for sure.
N01E
Hall of Fame
That makes it even worse. Sometimes players get aced or have no play on the ball and end up in this thread. Here however, he was in a rally in every single match point:
BGod
Legend
Very reminiscent of the Kyrgios-Gasquet match to me.
In this match Murray had two double MPs which begs the question why he didn't go aggressively on the first of those or even both of the 3rd & 4th. Statistically you have to take your odds. This reeks of Federer with his BP problems.
Dead Mosquito
Rookie
Fiero425
Hall of Fame
I hope he wasn't satisfied! He was just about eliminated on clay by someone like Goffin with no real weapons! Truly pathetic for someone with his ego!
_phantom
Professional
Great thread.
I think the list will be even more informative if you differentiate between double/triple MPs (consecutive) from 2/3 MPs.
Last edited:
ADuck
Legend
This will probably be criticized as overhyping Alcaraz, but I think @jm1980 you should consider adding him to this list at some point. I know this thread is for big 4 right now, but the comparison will be inevitable at some point and it'd be good to continue this thread with an updated title instead of starting a new one. What do others think?